Cellular operators on Thursday sought the help of the Telecom Regulator against the WLL players whom they allege are misleading the public into believing that WLL(M) was identical and even more advanced than mobile services.

In a letter to TRAI, cell operators point out the misleading advertisements, dealer communications, pamphlets and fliers promising the consumers SMS, WAP, video streaming, roaming, etc.

''Unless the TRAI stepped in to check these violations, it would cause an unfair churn of cellular subscribers to WLL(M) services under false pretences,'' the cellular operator said in the letter to TRAI.

The mobile industry also alleged that the WLL (M) services of Tata Teleservices are available across Delhi, Gurgaon, Faridabad and Ghaziabad, which are all separate short distance charging areas.

With over 2,600 SDCAs in the country, it was pointed out this breach underlines the massive regulatory task before the regulator to ensure that WLL (M) is offered strictly under permissible terms and conditions and does not transform into a full-blown cellular mobile service.

It was pointed out to the TRAI that the public sector operator BSNL was complying with the terms and conditions of WLL (M) and that the violations were being done by the private WLL (M) operators.

The industry drew the attention of the regulator to it own recommendations on WLL (M), which were accepted by the government and incorporated into the license agreements of the fixed operators.

It was pointed out that under their license, FSP could provide mobility to with their wireless access systems. The technical specifications for wireless access systems, which are laid down by the Telecom Engineering Centre do not include use of a Mobile Switching Centre as part of the generic model for WLL systems specified by TEC.

It was pointed out that as per the above, fixed operators could not use Mobile Exchanges, nor could they offer any service that is derived from the Mobile Exchange such as SMS, WAP, roaming, etc.

The regulator was also reminded of the TDSAT Order of December 20, 2002, which had directed DoT and TRAI to strictly enforce the above provisions.